Good

Fair

Poor

Terrible

I'm surprised more people aren't upset at the whole Bruce gives up being Batman ending. Isn't that something he would NEVER do in the comics?

Click to expand...

That & brooding over Rachel's death like a hermit for 8 years.

Click to expand...

I don't think Bruce had actually been a recluse for the entirety of that 8 years. 5 years into that timeframe, he was pouring money and resources into the fusion reactor project. Surely that would've required him to maintain at least some sort of public presence, at the very least at Wayne Enterprises if nowhere else. After a second viewing, my impression became that he was only a recluse during the last 3 years prior to TDKR, and that the need to shutter the reactor project compounded his grief over Rachel, driving him into seclusion.

I don't remember her exact dialogue now, but during the very first conversation between Bruce and Talia-as-Miranda, she made an observation about the reactor project and his seclusion that implied he didn't vanish until after the project had been shut down.

I don't think Bruce had actually been a recluse for the entirety of that 8 years. 5 years into that timeframe, he was pouring money and resources into the fusion reactor project. Surely that would've required him to maintain at least some sort of public presence, at the very least at Wayne Enterprises if nowhere else. After a second viewing, my impression became that he was only a recluse during the last 3 years prior to TDKR, and that the need to shutter the reactor project compounded his grief over Rachel, driving him into seclusion.

I don't remember her exact dialogue now, but during the very first conversation between Bruce and Talia-as-Miranda, she made an observation about the reactor project and his seclusion that implied he didn't vanish until after the project had been shut down.

Click to expand...

The issue for me is that Bruce Wayne is a driven personality, he requires strength, conviction, AND obsession. He doesn't just stop being what he is (Batman, among other things.) The depiction in the Nolan films shows someone who used the Batman persona temporarily to make a point and then fucked off. Kind of like an internet message board identity. It's not who he is. For Bruce Wayne to be Bruce Wayne/Batman, he should be thoroughly committed.

I appreciate in the Nolan universe that Bruce Wayne essentially fell apart when he stopped being Batman. His psyche is intimately tied to Batman, and to Gotham. If Gotham ceases to be, or changes radically, so too does Bruce Wayne cease to be. This is a pretty clear portrait in the story and kudos all around. That said, Bruce Wayne exists because he has extreme personality disorders, just like the Joker, et al. He doesn't just happen to stop needing to have the Batman persona to be able to deal with his personality needs.

In saying this, I like the story, and I don't. It touches the reality of the obsession and need, then it backs away from it. I don't feel it totally works as a character study.

I don't like to compare this film to Avengers; Avengers was like a symphony - it isn't about logic, it is about a trip from start to finish that leaves us thrilled. Nothing wrong with that and it does what it sought to do. TDKR is a different intent and different process. Does it do what it intended? For me there is some mixup in there.

What I do find sad, and this is about all superheroes, is that ever since the deconstruction of the superheroes got going in the '80s is the idea someone has to be psychologically flawed to even contemplate going beyond the norm to do something right.

Click to expand...

No, people don't have to be psychologically flawed to do something right. But people definitely have to be psychologically flawed to dress in a funny costume and/or put on a mask and go and beat up the bad guys.

Click to expand...

Nothing flawed about that actually. The suit is not a funny costume, it's a combat suit. It's absolutely necessary. The mask hides the identity. It could be a ski mask or a motorcycle helmet.

The shape of the mask, well, that's just a decision to somehow make this masked vigilante more than it is.

The issue for me is that Bruce Wayne is a driven personality, he requires strength, conviction, AND obsession. He doesn't just stop being what he is (Batman, among other things.) The depiction in the Nolan films shows someone who used the Batman persona temporarily to make a point and then fucked off. Kind of like an internet message board identity. It's not who he is. For Bruce Wayne to be Bruce Wayne/Batman, he should be thoroughly committed.

Click to expand...

Rachel's death and Harvey's fall are his fault. The situation escalated because he as Batman attracted freaks. Police blamed him for the Joker killing people. So eventually he as Batman took the blame for Dent's crimes and vanished so that the streets could be cleaned up properly.

This is shown in TDKR again. Bane and his thugs flee on motorbikes, and as soon as Batman shows up, the entire police force concentrates on him and him alone. His presence escalates the situation and makes it possible for criminals to escape.

What? Did you even read what I wrote? I said, why did Bruce bother to fake his own death when no one knew that he was the Batman other than close companions who would never reveal his identity. The LoS is gone and Blake is clearly an ally. He didn't have to kill Bruce Wayne off to retire The Batman.

That raises a point I have been wanting to make. Did Bruce really fake his death or he just not confirm he is alive? Maybe just a minor difference but a difference still.

He did not create an elaborate fake death scenerio. It not clear how he would have died. It just assumed he did in the chaos in Gotham.

Obviously he did create a will. But he did not know what would happen to him. He really could have died. Also all of the people closest to him know he lived. Alred, Gordon, Fox, and Selina. He made sure they had clues or out right proof of his survival. Robin may or may not have suspicions.

So its really the public who thinks Bruce Wayne is dead. Everything in his will he wanted to happen whether he died or not.

There is no reason he could not show up alive someday if he ever decides too.

The issue for me is that Bruce Wayne is a driven personality, he requires strength, conviction, AND obsession. He doesn't just stop being what he is (Batman, among other things.) The depiction in the Nolan films shows someone who used the Batman persona temporarily to make a point and then fucked off. Kind of like an internet message board identity. It's not who he is. For Bruce Wayne to be Bruce Wayne/Batman, he should be thoroughly committed.

I appreciate in the Nolan universe that Bruce Wayne essentially fell apart when he stopped being Batman. His psyche is intimately tied to Batman, and to Gotham. If Gotham ceases to be, or changes radically, so too does Bruce Wayne cease to be. This is a pretty clear portrait in the story and kudos all around. That said, Bruce Wayne exists because he has extreme personality disorders, just like the Joker, et al. He doesn't just happen to stop needing to have the Batman persona to be able to deal with his personality needs.

Click to expand...

You are talking about one, very particular interpretation of Batman But it's just one among many. You may like it best, but that really only matters to you.

For instance - I heartily disagree that Bruce Wayne has extreme personality disorders. Yes, the character has been portrayed that way - this was begun by Miller's the Dark Knight Returns, which most people forget was the story of a Bruce Wayne whose personailty had become distorted by years of impotency while Gotham City disintegrated around him. DKR was the Batman of the 70s (a supremely rational man) driven to the brink of madness by circumstance, not because he has inherent personality disorders.

Unfortunately, this interpretation got picked up and proliferated across Batman stories of the late 80s and 90s. But if you go back to the 70s, the years of Batman as the Dark Knight Detective (and this version seems to be by far the nearest to Nolan's interpretation), Bruce Wayne is first and foremost a clear-thinking and ingenious tactician, who uses fear to gain an advantage in battle. He is dedicated and driven, surely, but he is not obsessed. He has made clear choices in life - I will give up many things about a normal life in order to fight crime, but it is no more than a dedicated cop who decides never to marry gives up.

In saying this, I like the story, and I don't. It touches the reality of the obsession and need, then it backs away from it. I don't feel it totally works as a character study.

Click to expand...

It probably does - it's just the study of character who ends up not really being that interesting. BBegins and TDK seemed to be telling the tale of a man who makes a pretty out there decision to try to shock an entire city into straightening up. It ends up working for a bit, then going badly due to the introduction of a force of chaos equal and opposite to the force for order that Batman is. The story of the character at this point is strangely heroic/tragic - Bruce wanted to exorcise his demons and lay down the cowl for personal happiness, but it seems at the end of TDK that he has come to accept a darker destiny: to endure, to be the dark hero that people may hate but who will work nonetheless to save them all. That's a pretty interesting guy and a pretty interesting story.

Then TDKR opens and we find out that rather than enduring and continuing in spite of hate - he sulls up in his mansion and pouts. Because he is personally attacked he reenters "the game", loses the city to terrorists and manages at the last moment to stop them from blowing the place sky high (though not managing to stop a great deal of misery in between). So he pats himself on the back, grabs a hot chick and retires for good, leaving all his cool gadgets to someone else - to do what with is entirely unclear.

Not so interesting of a hero after all.

But it really doesn't have anything to do with how obsessive or not he is - especially since that's an interpretation of the character that is beside the point of the tale Nolan was telling. The trilogy, however, ends up not being a particularly powerful story even judged by its own internal rules.

My only problems with The Dark Knight Rises had to with Bruce Wayne and Bruce Wayne alone. Since he's the main character, it guts the movie in my eyes. It also pisses away what was built up in the last two movies.

John Blake is a different matter. If they wanted to do a spin-off movie with him as Nightwing, I'd look forward to that. I doubt he'll be Batman.

I'm guessing the next Batman movie will be spun-off from a Justice League film, to ease the transition for the audience into a reboot. Otherwise, jumping in cold from TDKR to whatever the next version of Batman is will feel too much like whiplash.

After watching the whole trilogy last (accumulating with my third viewing of The Dark Knight Rises), I noticed something I don't think anyone has mentioned yet (but I could be wrong): The pearl necklace that Selina steals is the same one Thomas Wayne gave to Martha Wayne the night of their murder.

But since Bruce tells Selina that's his mothers it's not really anything to notice. We were told. He may even tell Alfred, something like "one of the maids stole my mothers pearls", I can't recall that exact phrasing. On the dance floor when he reclaims them I feel certain he made mention they were his mothers.

I guess I could pop in the DVD and look for it in Begins but are they not being worn when they exit the back door of the theater.
I don't think they are broken from her neck and seen bouncing on the pavement like is drawn in the comics, or shown in the Burton film. If that's what you mean. But I think they are shown around her neck at least.